Section 9 The plaintiffs' position for the acquisition of immovable property and the acquisition of suit property was that the defendants had infringed on their property The suit was dismissed concurrently whether the actual dispute between the parties was whether The defendant infringed on the plaintiff's property. In order to prove the infringement, the plaintiffs were obliged under the law to prove the distribution of suit property exclusively and then to prove the defendants' transgressions on the property in their possession so that the plaintiff admitted that In the site plan, the specific part of the claimant was not mentioned. Further, the marks mentioned in the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner were also not available on the site plan. The important questions regarding the distribution and distribution were not addressed by the parties and no proper evidence was presented in this regard. Rejected. With instructions to set up a local commission for site inspection and site planning for the site down to the trial company and the trial company, and after the actual possession of the parties is disclosed, directing the issue to be resolved, Accordingly, revisions were allowed,
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
